Kosovo’s Independence: did it violate international

law?
BY Hemant Walia

Kosovo's one-sided announcement of freedom from Serbia in

February 2008 didn't disregard global law, the International
Court of Justice in the Hague said today as the United Nations
court delivered its perspective and suggestions on the issue.

The ICJ, was asked by the General Assembly to offer its input
,which is non-official and not legally binding, on the lawfulness of
the autonomy assertion by the Provisional Institutions of Self-
Government of Kosovo.

By 10 votes to 4, the ICJ reasoned that the assertion doesn't break

either broad worldwide law, a Security Council goal from 1999
after the finish of battling in Kosovo, or the sacred system that
was embraced by the Secretary-General's Special Representative
for the benefit of the UN Interim Administration Mission or
UNMIK in Kosovo. Since international law contains no
“prohibition on declarations of independence”, Kosovo’s
declaration “did not violate international law.”

UNMIK was built up after Western powers drove out Yugoslav

powers in the midst of between ethnic battling in 1999. Ethnic
Albanians dwarf ethnic Serbs and different minorities by around
nine to one in Kosovo.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon had called for rational, free-

flowing exchange between all sides in the wake of the ICJ
assessment.

However, legal experts warned could spur separatist movements

around the world. Lawful specialists said that while the
International Court of Justice had decided that Kosovo's
revelation of freedom was legitimate, it had abstained from saying
that the territory of Kosovo was lawful under global law, a
limited and deliberately aligned trade off that they said could
permit the two sides to pronounce triumph in a potential conflict.

It also increased support and recognition for the country globally,

even though of the 192 nations only 69 had recognized Kosovo
then, including the US,UK and many EU states.

Investigators said that the lawful authenticity gave on the

freedom revelation by the court could have significant
ramifications for international affairs by possibly being taken
advantage of by secessionist developments in places as vast as
Somaliland, South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Transnistria. It could
also have had negative implications on nations like India, with
disputed territories in the country such as Kashmir getting
encouraged to declare their own independence, in the hope that
their decision would be deemed legitimate.